Talk:Nathaniel Grey (Earth-295)
Nate Grey was one of my favorite character on a line of good things that Marvel did in the time of his creation. The comic was easily one of the best that the 90's had produced and I believe had it have stay true to it's original style and story (that is of course after they had mastered Nates Temperment to a certain degree) the comics longevity would have spanned much further than it did. Unfortunately the release of the movie along with the seggestions of chris claremmont caused for his cancelation due to bad writing and even worse artwork. I miss him, and maybe one day he will be back. Fingers crossed fans. Nate can come back as in endangered species Dark beast & beast were saying if they collected all of Nate atoms & stuff he can be bought back to life & i upped pics of his "death" also & yes ' i want Nate back' . Praetor HellionVulcan 17:02, 2 May 2008 (UTC) Nathaniel? Is there any basis for his real name being "Nathaniel"? I've NEVER heard him referred to as Nathaniel (not sure I've heard Nathan either...but that's easier to believe). --GrnMarvl14 19:49, 2 May 2009 (UTC) :No basis that I know of, who made the edit? What do the handbooks say? Was he named 'Nate' specifically? (I'd think it's Nathan, since Cable's name is Nathan). :— Nathan (Peteparker) (Earth-1218) (talk • • ) 22:52, 2 May 2009 (UTC) ::Book of the Dead (from 2004) lists him as Nate Grey. In the Age of Apocalypse entry in the Official Handbook A-Z hardcover Vol 1, he's also listed as Nate Grey (though Cannonball's listed as Sam Guthrie). Not sure where else (if anywhere) he's been profiled. ::--GrnMarvl14 23:43, 2 May 2009 (UTC) :::X-Man #-1 has Sinister calling him Nathan, and as his creator, I think Sinister would be the ultimate authority on Nate's real name. I've never heard the character called Nathaniel. I think we're fine where we are.--Max 04:46, 3 May 2009 (UTC) ::::Agreed. No Nathaniel from what I have read either. Nathaniel is a formalized Nathan, but does not necessarily mean that his name is Nathaniel. --M1shawhan 04:56, 3 May 2009 (UTC) :I'm reverting the page move, barring some sort of confirmation for "Nathaniel." :--GrnMarvl14 16:01, 23 May 2009 (UTC) cable/nathan relation I was wondering about the edit removing the claim that Cable was his genetic twin. While it is true that they come from very different backgrounds, X-Man being a creation from the DNA of the 295-Cyclops and Jean Grey, respectively, and Cable being the biological son of the 616-Cyclops and Madelyne Pryor, indeed the genetic base material would be the same, since Jean Grey and Madelyne Pryor are gentically identical. I'm not sure whether that holds true across the borders of the multiverse as well, but it is certainly undeniable that the two characters are "related" in some way. I was wondering if there was a better, possibly more accurate wording for this than "genetic twin"?--edkaufman 12:33, November 16, 2009 (UTC) :Genetic "brothers"?--Max 21:44, November 16, 2009 (UTC) ::"Cross-temporal genetic relation"? Too complicated? Not entirely accurate? ::--GrnMarvl14 23:13, November 16, 2009 (UTC) :::"Alternate Reality Genetic Half-Brothers", since their mother, although of the same DNA, is different, and their fathers are from different realities, so they're really not even half-brothers. Sure, they come from the same gene-pool, but really not from the same parents whatsoever. :::Talk about a tough relation. Did they ever meet? :::— Nathan (Peteparker) (Earth-1218) (talk • • ) 18:05, November 17, 2009 (UTC) ::::I'd bet almost anything on it. C'mon, it was 90s. Everyone was meeting everyone. ::::--GrnMarvl14 21:41, November 17, 2009 (UTC) :::::Sure, they had some crossovers. Can't remember all the circumstances off hand. It was the 90's. X-books crossed over so much plot points would happen in the wrong book sometimes.--Max 08:02, November 18, 2009 (UTC) : I quickly leafed through what i could find as common appearances in the database: In Cable #31, there's the following caption: "His name is Nate Grey. Torn from a timeline that has since been erased, he is genetically identical to Cable in every way... including mutant power." Would certainly speak for the genetic twin idea, wouldn't it? Since Madelyne and Jean are genetically identical, it would make sense for their respective sons with the same father to be genetically identical too. The only problem, scientifically (as far as i can tell with lay knowledge) speaking, with that is that during a natural birth (Cable) genes would be scrambled around in a different way than during the making of a genetic cocktail (Nate). But considering what the ish says is canon, are we back to genetic twin? BTW, Nate calls Cable "big brother" in the same ish. Also in X-Man #46, Stryfe calls Nate "just another Cable, just another me." what do you think?--edkaufman 13:38, November 18, 2009 (UTC) :In Cable's last Handbook entry, X-Man is listed as his "alternate timeline half-brother." Which makes sense, since Scott was married to both Jean and Madelyne. :--GrnMarvl14 22:31, November 18, 2009 (UTC) ::The thing about genetic twins reference though is that its just bad... bad.... really really bad science.--Max 22:39, November 18, 2009 (UTC) :::I totally agree with you on that. Still: this is Marvel comics we're talking about. Transistors making an Iron Man Armor fly. A radioactive spider turning giving a science geek a "spider sense". Genetic mutation turning a guy's eyes into freaking laser cannons. And in this specific case: A guy from a timeline which turned out never to even have existed at all coming over to anpther universe and looking, sounding and having powers exactly the same as a guy whose base genetic material was the same - btw: all brothers and sisters in the world share the same genetic base material, and the similarities between them are hardly ever as close. Either way, i just think there has to be a linking entry between the two characters: be that "genetic twin" (for which there is canon reference, even though it's bad science) or "alternate timeline half-brother" (which sounds horrible, but is more accurate). can someone make a decision here? --edkaufman 01:03, November 19, 2009 (UTC) ::::Actually, the AoA reality still existed after the fact. And I'm all for whatever's more accurate, in this instance. To me, genetic twin is confusing. After all, aren't ALL twins genetic twins? Plus, while Madelyne may have been a clone of Jean Grey, there's no telling what Sinister screwed around with (same with AoA's Sinister and his creation of Nate), so they might not even be as genetically similar as you're assuming. And, really, twin tends to assume that they came from the same mother. Which isn't the case. Same genes, but if two identical twins had children by the same father, you wouldn't call those children twins. ::::--GrnMarvl14 01:31, November 19, 2009 (UTC) :::::Since their is no reconciling the science with reality (its all essentially magic like just about all Marvel science), I say go with the creator's intent as best as we can, whatever that may be. I have no preference beyond that.--Max 02:47, November 19, 2009 (UTC) :Let's use both, like: "genetic twin/alternate timeline half-brother", since both were specifically said in references. :— Nathan (Peteparker) (Earth-1218) (talk • • ) 15:50, November 20, 2009 (UTC) :Why isn't Nate Grey the AoA version of Cable, both are engineered from the genetics of Scott Summers and Jean Grey(Madelyn Prior) and have virtually the same power? --Lwmorton 01:22, March 15, 2010 (UTC)